tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post1159712577961600188..comments2023-12-22T08:29:29.230-08:00Comments on WHAT IS TRUTH: Going Too Far with Separation?Kent Brandenburghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-85836940465457642052012-05-04T22:20:39.649-07:002012-05-04T22:20:39.649-07:00El or Anonymous,
To start, isn't this anonymi...El or Anonymous,<br /><br />To start, isn't this anonymity cowardice? So I'm guessing you're a fundamentalist, because this is how they normally operate. <br /><br />Second, I don't know what point you're attempting to make, because, if anything, it backs up the point of my post. <br /><br />Third, you show some good knowledge of early MBBC, knowledge that doesn't contradict anything I've said. I said that I didn't hear the critical text taught when I was there, and that includes after Weniger came. I gave the years: 1974-1987. I'm sure things didn't change right away out of respect for Dr. C. I recognize that after I left, Weniger brought his beliefs, and I explained why, if you read the comments (if the truth matters to you).<br /><br />Fourth, I knew all four people were critical text, partly because my dad was a Greek major and won the award for top Greek student, and then I was a biblical language major and won the award for top Greek student. And yet none of those guys mentioned it or taught it while I was there. Barnes taught me second year Hebrew and he never questioned the Masoretic text. Hershberger didn't teach biblical languages, and never referred to the critical text that I ever heard. He just wouldn't. He couldn't. It's not how it worked then.<br /><br />If you have actually evidence to the contrary, it would be interesting to hear it. But just saying these names doesn't prove anything.<br /><br />On top of this, I don't get your point. What is it?<br /><br />Thanks.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-53975465273758058752012-05-04T18:02:48.429-07:002012-05-04T18:02:48.429-07:00Max Barnes - critical text.
Dave Hershberger - cri...Max Barnes - critical text.<br />Dave Hershberger - critical text.<br />Joe Huebscher - critical text.<br />Bud Weniger - critical text (Dr. Cedarholm's hand-picked successor)Elhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12723653363765586099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-4755969308618138602012-05-02T23:08:36.642-07:002012-05-02T23:08:36.642-07:00Lance,
I absolutely agree, and I actually quoted ...Lance,<br /><br />I absolutely agree, and I actually quoted you in our book on the very point.<br /><br />Anonymous,<br /><br />Your comment would make me laugh if it weren't so sad. I was in Watertown from 1974 to 1987. Maranatha was TR only that entire time and nothing else was taught there that entire time. Maranatha used only the TR and only the KJV that entire time. The first meeting of the Dean Burgon society was on the campus and it was a huge deal. Then take Steve's quote from Dr. C from one of only two books that Maranatha ever published. I have both books. I knew the faculty there at that time well, and I never heard anything but attack on the critical text when I was there. Nothing else. Any faculty who were critical text didn't have or take the liberty to mention it. I've heard that MBBC used the N/A text its first few years. I wouldn't call it a matter of inviting disagreeing positions on campus if that was the case, but an all new position. Dr. C wasn't a president who allowed one of many positions. He was no divorce and no remarriage and I heard nothing different from anyone else. He was local only ecclesiology and I heard nothing else taught there. He was TR and KJV only and I heard nothing else taught there. Putting that aside, Dr. C chose Arno Weniger to replace him. My interpretation of that, having talked to Dr. C about it, was that it was a pragmatic choice based upon bad financial conditions. Putting all that aside, I wouldn't send my kids to Maranatha today even if Dr. C were there. And he would understand it.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-67304342446712491832012-05-02T12:35:46.355-07:002012-05-02T12:35:46.355-07:00Anonymous,
Your comments are a little cryptic. Y...Anonymous,<br /><br />Your comments are a little cryptic. You seem to be saying that Dr. C was not KJV/TR only, but that he hired KJV/TR only faculty, who then in turn, taught students that position. Supposedly one of us, we don't know who, but one of us only now holds to a KJVO/TRO position because Dr C hired faculty that were such. I'd be careful about that. <br /><br />Many alumni,including my father, can verify that Cedarholm was a TR guy, although it is clearly apparent that he did choose someone who was not as his successor,AW.<br /><br />In 1981, MBBC published a book entitled, Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, by Everett Fowler. In it, Dr. Cedarholm wrote the following introduction. <br /><br />"Maranatha Baptist Bible College is dedicated to the defense of the Masoretic Text, the Textus Receptus, and the Authorized Version and uses them in its classes for study and the Authorized Version in the churches for preaching. Maranatha is the first college to organize on its campus a Dean Burgon Society chapter, which society exists for the defense of the traditional Bible texts."<br /><br />It would seem that Dr. C's choice to diversify the faculty led to the students eventually developing a position against KJVO/TRO, contrary to his own of KJVO/TRO, and thus, the current position of the school as reflected by Bro. Oats' comments.<br /><br />My current assistant was interviewed for a job on the staff a few years ago, and they made it clear to him, a KJVO/TRO position was not going to be tolerated at MBBC.<br /><br />Unless you (anonymous)are Dr C coming back to 2012 to clarify this issue, I'd be careful about saying he was not KJV/TR. Although the current trend of MBBC may have sparked the proverbial "turning over in their graves."Steve Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920334627083544106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-31146758396260788752012-05-02T10:29:03.512-07:002012-05-02T10:29:03.512-07:00Anonymous,
It would help if you would identify bo...Anonymous,<br /><br />It would help if you would identify both yourself and the "you" you are addressing your comments to. They hold more weight that way and add to the discussion when folks know who they are engaging and when they have been addressed.Steve Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920334627083544106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-21876853912139071612012-05-02T08:39:15.822-07:002012-05-02T08:39:15.822-07:00Interesting comments - Dr. Cedarholm hired faculty...Interesting comments - Dr. Cedarholm hired faculty who disagreed with his own position on the King James - which allowed you to be taught to become KJV (or TR) only. If he followed your advice, you would not be TR-only. Guess you're right!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-11353858057732036792012-05-02T08:33:48.559-07:002012-05-02T08:33:48.559-07:00And by the way, I'm one of those "younger...And by the way, I'm one of those "younger pastors" who thinks there needs to be uniformity of doctrinal agreement. Perhaps, the "younger pastors" who have such concerns and zeal, do so because they have not yet been indoctrinated with the way things work if you want to climb the ladder of funamentalism. Perhaps at this point they are just content to please their chief shepherd and not the chiefs of the fundamental movement. Crazy kids...Steve Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920334627083544106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-90683428063981126842012-05-02T08:19:45.753-07:002012-05-02T08:19:45.753-07:00Pastor Brandenburg,
This ties in well with the di...Pastor Brandenburg,<br /><br />This ties in well with the discussion of the parachurch Christian colleges, which of course, are the offspring of fundamentalism. Churches plant churches because they have the Biblical authority to do so. Movements have to birth something else, because they have no Biblical commission to carry out nor authority to ordain, although many try.<br /><br />Now, how does this teaching on "not taking separation too far" apply to the Christian college discussion? Well, as you said, fundamentalism is all about getting together. Without the strength in numbers philosophy, the movement would not exist, nor would any of it's daughters (colleges,etc.). This is why they are such staunch defenders of Augustinian universal church ecclesiology as opposed to local only ecclesiology. Folks would have to go back to that old ideal of the local church. <br /><br />Bro. Oats was a classmate of my fathers at MBBC. He knows the distinct doctrines that have changed there. He knows that in order for a fundamental college to exist, it must streamline itself enough to draw from the movement, but not too much, unless it is prepared to move to a new movement like New Evangelicalism, IE...the transitions we have seen at other once fundamental schools, like Liberty, Cedarville, TTU, etc. Right now, some fundamental schools are experiencing such a dilemma, as they transition from one movement to another. NIU sticks out in my mind, because my family has intimate knowledge of the direction and destination of that particular example.<br /><br />Your point and evaluation are spot on. There is definitely not a huge movement toward separating too much. The Bible actually indicates that the trend will be the opposite as the rapture nears. Fundamentalists know this, and so they have to give verbal acknowledgment to separation, but the goalposts keep moving in order to perpetuate a movement and institutions that have no promise of perpetuity from the Lord. Eventually, the list of "separatable" doctrines will be narrowed down to 1 core doctrine, the Gospel. (sound familiar?) And then that doctrine will be said to have different positions on it's content and application.<br /><br />Thus, the dilemma of NT pastors and churches. Why should we send our kids to institutions that are not committed to the whole counsel of God, as applied to separation. Why support and endorse the idea that the scripture IS OF PRIVATE INTERPRETATION, and that to separate over more than the approved list, is to be in danger of the heretic label? Why endorse the idea that bibliology and ecclesiology and pneumatology and eschatology are not areas where we can separate over any more? Separational reductionism (is that a word?)and the buffet approach to doctrine and interpretation are just 2 more reasons NOT to continue this pattern of underwriting fundamental Christian colleges. Thank you once again for the clear example.Steve Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920334627083544106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-30481437328027160002012-05-02T07:18:09.906-07:002012-05-02T07:18:09.906-07:00" He brags about hiring Bible faculty who tak..." He brags about hiring Bible faculty who take opposing points of view, an argument being that this diversity of doctrine is a strength for students (a little after minute 37)."<br /><br />I am not sure everyone sees what Dr. Oats exposes about himself and MBBC in this statement. It is essentially an abdication of theological dogmatism in order to propagate some kind of pseudo-unity or pseudo-fellowship. It is purely Hegelian in its philosophy.Lancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04407932936189262291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-35468727629644912702012-05-02T06:43:04.157-07:002012-05-02T06:43:04.157-07:00When ambiguity becomes the main criterion for sepa...When ambiguity becomes the main criterion for separation the outcome is always going to pragmatic dulling the the dividing Sword (Matthew 10:34).Lancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04407932936189262291noreply@blogger.com